Douglas Estes: How many lies must Hillary tell before it’s ‘enough’?
Re “FBI chief: Clinton was careless, but she didn’t lie” (Page 8A, July 8): When asked by Congress, the FBI chief cited numerous lies Hillary Clinton made, under oath to Congress, and to the American people. He also said it was “extremely careless,” not just careless.
Your editorial board stated, “The Republicans – who have investigated Hillary Clinton seven times over her role in Benghazi – won’t let this go. They are clearly intent on wringing every last drop of political gain out of an issue that doesn’t appear to contain much.”
Wow, lying to the American public and to parents of servicemen that died, refusing guns to protect the embassy because they might offend the local people, discussing the type of uniform or armor a rescue force should wear so as not to upset the locals, then standing down any rescue attempt, is “not much”?
This same FBI chief sent Martha Stewart to prison for lying, but didn’t look at Hillary’s lies to Congress (he said Congress would have to request that), or put her under oath. He clearly stated Hillary lied.
The question: should Congress request the FBI investigate Hillary’s lies to Congress under oath?
Doug Estes, Modesto
This story was originally published July 20, 2016 at 1:29 PM with the headline "Douglas Estes: How many lies must Hillary tell before it’s ‘enough’?."